Fuel Saver Pro Device

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06 Oct 2003, 11:22 am   #1 (permalink)
sam
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Fuel Saver Pro Device

On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:


> If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.



That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:


http://www.shepinc.com


An excerpt from their web site:

==================

.... The SHEP (stored hydraulic energy propulsion) system captures
energy used during braking and recycles the energy back into the
vehicle at the time it needs it most; when accelerating from a
dead stop.

This is the time at which the engine is performing least efficiently,
burning the most fuel, and emitting the most pollutants.

During the braking process, formerly wasted energy is captured
in hydraulic tanks attached to the vehicle's chassis. When the
vehicle accelerates from a dead stop, the computer instructs the
pump to apply the stored energy to the drive shaft. The vehicle
moves forward without requiring the engine to do so.

Once the energy stored in the hydraulic system has been used
up, the computer instructs the normal engine function to
take over.

The next time the brakes are applied, the hydraulic tanks capture
the wasted energy once again, and the process is repeated when
accelerating.

The SHEP system is a hydraulic drive system that recovers
vehicle braking energy, and returns it to the vehicle when it
needs it most- when the vehicle is at a stop...

==================

To me, this makes sense. Think about the following:

If a car weighs 1000 kg and accelerates to 60 mph (27 m/sec), the
force required is about 365,000 joules of kinetic energy.

At 100% efficiency one gallon of gas contains the energy about
350 such acceleration cycles but of course no vehicle is anywhere
near 100% efficient. With current technology, 10% efficiency
is more like it.

Stored hydraulic energy propulsion, if successful in recycling 70%
of the 365,000 joules of energy referred to above would imply
255,500 joules saved per 0-60MPH vehicle acceleration cycle.

A gallon of gas contains 132 million joules of energy, or the
equivalent of the energy saved in 517 vehicle acceleration
cycles.

132,000,000 / 255,500 = 517

So how many 1000kg 0-60MPH vehicle acceleration cycles occur every
day? Just in the US, there are over 200 million vehicles. Let's
conservatively suppose that one quarter of them are used daily
and experience two dozen (24) 0-60MPH acceleration cycles.
That means:

(200M vehicles / 4) * (24 a.c.) = 1.2B acceleration cycles

1.2B accel. cycles / 517 = 2,321,083 gallons of gas saved per day

Obviously you can slice and dice this many ways. We haven't
factored in the capital cost of Stored hydraulic energy
propulsion system either, and with gas under $2 gallon in most
areas of the USA maybe it doesn't yet pay. Maybe it would with
$5 gallon gas. Or maybe it would in a commercial application
like buses or trucks. I dunno.

A variety of assumptions can be applied, but the main point is
that there ARE things that can be done to improve vehicle
efficiency that aren't yet being done and just because automobile
manufacturer's aren't doing them yet doesn't necessarily mean
they're not possible or not feasible. Usually these "miracle"
gas mileage increasing things are gimmicks. But not always.

FH

P.S. I don't work for SHEP, own any of their stock or have any
affiliation with them whatsoever.



On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "XXXXX" <NOSPAM@ISP.COM> wrote:

> >I got a junk email about this device and I was wondering what your take is
> >on it. Here is the link: http://www.fuelsaverpro.com/
> >
> >


> If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.


> Even if it only improved by 1mpg... that would be a big step in
> enhancing CAFE ratings, which is MAJORLY beneficial to the automakers.


> --- Rich
> http://richlockyer.nospampleasetripod.com/

  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 12:05 pm   #2 (permalink)
mark Ransley
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

Electric and hybrids do the same thing , using the electric motors as
generators on braking, hydraulic ,its a good idea, but at what cost and
weight.

  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 12:12 pm   #3 (permalink)
mark Ransley
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

Its a magnet, thats all, and sure overly priced. By a magnet, try one
let us know. There is that Tornado thing to, and
water injection, and more. Scams.

  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 07:11 pm   #4 (permalink)
Tegger®
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

fantastic_health@yahoo.com (sam) pontificated in
news:a7cc49b3.0310060822.19e5ae5b@posting.google.c om:

> On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:
>
>
>> If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

>
>
> That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
> stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:




I came up with this brilliant idea for a torsionally charged polymeric
stored energy device to power cars. Couldn't get any investor interest.
:^(

--
TeGGeR®
  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 07:34 pm   #5 (permalink)
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device


"Tegger®" <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns940CCD9ED2C79teggeratistop@66.11.168.195.. .
> fantastic_health@yahoo.com (sam) pontificated in
> news:a7cc49b3.0310060822.19e5ae5b@posting.google.c om:
>
> > On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:
> >
> >
> >> If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

> >
> >
> > That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
> > stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:

>
>
>
> I came up with this brilliant idea for a torsionally charged polymeric
> stored energy device to power cars. Couldn't get any investor interest.


Aren't those common is small aircraft?


  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 08:20 pm   #6 (permalink)
Rich Lockyer
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

On 6 Oct 2003 09:22:01 -0700, fantastic_health@yahoo.com (sam) wrote:

>On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:
>
>
>> If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

>
>
>That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
>stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:


Within practicality.

The Fuel Saver Pro, and other such gadgets are inexpensive enough so
as to make the impact on the sticker price minute.



--- Rich
http://richlockyer.tripod.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 09:32 pm   #7 (permalink)
MudPuppy1976
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device



Gmlyle@scvnet.com wrote:
> "Tegger®" <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns940CCD9ED2C79teggeratistop@66.11.168.195.. .
>
>>fantastic_health@yahoo.com (sam) pontificated in
>>news:a7cc49b3.0310060822.19e5ae5b@posting.google .com:
>>
>>
>>>On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.
>>>
>>>
>>>That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
>>>stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:

>>
>>
>>
>>I came up with this brilliant idea for a torsionally charged polymeric
>>stored energy device to power cars. Couldn't get any investor interest.

>
>
> Aren't those common is small aircraft?
>
>

it sounds all too familiar to the government lingo to explain why a
hammer costs $20,000 (they call it an "interfibrous friction fastening
device") and perhaps the toilet seat ($30,000) could be called a
"gleuteous support facilitator" but i'm not sure on that one.

BTW tegger, you can buy such a device already, marketed as a volkswagen
engine rebuild kit. i suppose two could be the turbo model?

--
Ben Jerew
ASE Master Technician
New Country Lexus of Latham, NY
Amateur Off-Roader

  Reply With Quote
Old 06 Oct 2003, 09:43 pm   #8 (permalink)
Tegger®
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

"MudPuppy1976 <\"moc.rr.pacyn\"@67lamina" <--BACKWARDS> pontificated in
news:tBpgb.3507$Sc7.915@twister.nyroc.rr.com:

>
>
> Gmlyle@scvnet.com wrote:
>> "Tegger®" <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote in
>> message news:Xns940CCD9ED2C79teggeratistop@66.11.168.195.. .
>>
>>>
>>>I came up with this brilliant idea for a torsionally charged
>>>polymeric stored energy device to power cars. Couldn't get any
>>>investor interest.

>>
>>
>> Aren't those common is small aircraft?

>
> BTW tegger, you can buy such a device already, marketed as a
> volkswagen engine rebuild kit. i suppose two could be the turbo
> model?



Get four and it can be the AWD model.


--
TeGGeR®
  Reply With Quote
Old 07 Oct 2003, 08:33 pm   #9 (permalink)
woohoo!
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

Last Time I checked, hydraulics couldnt store energy as the oil wont
compress.. Just can push stuff like a steel rod would. You need something to
push the rod or Oil like "air pressure".
I see no mention of air pressure storing the energy though.
The pictures just show oil being pumped in a tank so it must be just air
pressure pushing it back. Must some serious pressure to move a loaded
garbage truck.

"sam" <fantastic_health@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a7cc49b3.0310060822.19e5ae5b@posting.google.c om...
> On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:
>
>
> > If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

>
>
> That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
> stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:
>
>
> http://www.shepinc.com
>
>
> An excerpt from their web site:
>
> ==================
>
> ... The SHEP (stored hydraulic energy propulsion) system captures
> energy used during braking and recycles the energy back into the
> vehicle at the time it needs it most; when accelerating from a
> dead stop.
>
> This is the time at which the engine is performing least efficiently,
> burning the most fuel, and emitting the most pollutants.
>
> During the braking process, formerly wasted energy is captured
> in hydraulic tanks attached to the vehicle's chassis. When the
> vehicle accelerates from a dead stop, the computer instructs the
> pump to apply the stored energy to the drive shaft. The vehicle
> moves forward without requiring the engine to do so.
>
> Once the energy stored in the hydraulic system has been used
> up, the computer instructs the normal engine function to
> take over.
>
> The next time the brakes are applied, the hydraulic tanks capture
> the wasted energy once again, and the process is repeated when
> accelerating.
>
> The SHEP system is a hydraulic drive system that recovers
> vehicle braking energy, and returns it to the vehicle when it
> needs it most- when the vehicle is at a stop...
>
> ==================
>
> To me, this makes sense. Think about the following:
>
> If a car weighs 1000 kg and accelerates to 60 mph (27 m/sec), the
> force required is about 365,000 joules of kinetic energy.
>
> At 100% efficiency one gallon of gas contains the energy about
> 350 such acceleration cycles but of course no vehicle is anywhere
> near 100% efficient. With current technology, 10% efficiency
> is more like it.
>
> Stored hydraulic energy propulsion, if successful in recycling 70%
> of the 365,000 joules of energy referred to above would imply
> 255,500 joules saved per 0-60MPH vehicle acceleration cycle.
>
> A gallon of gas contains 132 million joules of energy, or the
> equivalent of the energy saved in 517 vehicle acceleration
> cycles.
>
> 132,000,000 / 255,500 = 517
>
> So how many 1000kg 0-60MPH vehicle acceleration cycles occur every
> day? Just in the US, there are over 200 million vehicles. Let's
> conservatively suppose that one quarter of them are used daily
> and experience two dozen (24) 0-60MPH acceleration cycles.
> That means:
>
> (200M vehicles / 4) * (24 a.c.) = 1.2B acceleration cycles
>
> 1.2B accel. cycles / 517 = 2,321,083 gallons of gas saved per day
>
> Obviously you can slice and dice this many ways. We haven't
> factored in the capital cost of Stored hydraulic energy
> propulsion system either, and with gas under $2 gallon in most
> areas of the USA maybe it doesn't yet pay. Maybe it would with
> $5 gallon gas. Or maybe it would in a commercial application
> like buses or trucks. I dunno.
>
> A variety of assumptions can be applied, but the main point is
> that there ARE things that can be done to improve vehicle
> efficiency that aren't yet being done and just because automobile
> manufacturer's aren't doing them yet doesn't necessarily mean
> they're not possible or not feasible. Usually these "miracle"
> gas mileage increasing things are gimmicks. But not always.
>
> FH
>
> P.S. I don't work for SHEP, own any of their stock or have any
> affiliation with them whatsoever.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "XXXXX" <NOSPAM@ISP.COM> wrote:
>
> > >I got a junk email about this device and I was wondering what your take

is
> > >on it. Here is the link: http://www.fuelsaverpro.com/
> > >
> > >

>
> > If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

>
> > Even if it only improved by 1mpg... that would be a big step in
> > enhancing CAFE ratings, which is MAJORLY beneficial to the automakers.

>
> > --- Rich
> > http://richlockyer.nospampleasetripod.com/



  Reply With Quote
Old 07 Oct 2003, 09:03 pm   #10 (permalink)
Scott C
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Fuel Saver Pro Device

Actually hydraulic accumulators have been around for many years!!!
Think of a cylinder with a pre-charged air bladder. The hydraulic fluid
pushes against the bladder filling up the volume and compressing the air -
at pressure.
Similar to your water storage tank if you run a well for drinking water.

"woohoo!" <bboyl(nospam)@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:9QJgb.253162$Lnr1.82785@news01.bloor.is.net.c able.rogers.com...
> Last Time I checked, hydraulics couldnt store energy as the oil wont
> compress.. Just can push stuff like a steel rod would. You need something

to
> push the rod or Oil like "air pressure".
> I see no mention of air pressure storing the energy though.
> The pictures just show oil being pumped in a tank so it must be just air
> pressure pushing it back. Must some serious pressure to move a loaded
> garbage truck.
>
> "sam" <fantastic_health@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:a7cc49b3.0310060822.19e5ae5b@posting.google.c om...
> > On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "RICH" wrote:
> >
> >
> > > If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

> >
> >
> > That's usually true but not always. For example, take a look at this
> > stored hydraulic energy propulsion technology:
> >
> >
> > http://www.shepinc.com
> >
> >
> > An excerpt from their web site:
> >
> > ==================
> >
> > ... The SHEP (stored hydraulic energy propulsion) system captures
> > energy used during braking and recycles the energy back into the
> > vehicle at the time it needs it most; when accelerating from a
> > dead stop.
> >
> > This is the time at which the engine is performing least efficiently,
> > burning the most fuel, and emitting the most pollutants.
> >
> > During the braking process, formerly wasted energy is captured
> > in hydraulic tanks attached to the vehicle's chassis. When the
> > vehicle accelerates from a dead stop, the computer instructs the
> > pump to apply the stored energy to the drive shaft. The vehicle
> > moves forward without requiring the engine to do so.
> >
> > Once the energy stored in the hydraulic system has been used
> > up, the computer instructs the normal engine function to
> > take over.
> >
> > The next time the brakes are applied, the hydraulic tanks capture
> > the wasted energy once again, and the process is repeated when
> > accelerating.
> >
> > The SHEP system is a hydraulic drive system that recovers
> > vehicle braking energy, and returns it to the vehicle when it
> > needs it most- when the vehicle is at a stop...
> >
> > ==================
> >
> > To me, this makes sense. Think about the following:
> >
> > If a car weighs 1000 kg and accelerates to 60 mph (27 m/sec), the
> > force required is about 365,000 joules of kinetic energy.
> >
> > At 100% efficiency one gallon of gas contains the energy about
> > 350 such acceleration cycles but of course no vehicle is anywhere
> > near 100% efficient. With current technology, 10% efficiency
> > is more like it.
> >
> > Stored hydraulic energy propulsion, if successful in recycling 70%
> > of the 365,000 joules of energy referred to above would imply
> > 255,500 joules saved per 0-60MPH vehicle acceleration cycle.
> >
> > A gallon of gas contains 132 million joules of energy, or the
> > equivalent of the energy saved in 517 vehicle acceleration
> > cycles.
> >
> > 132,000,000 / 255,500 = 517
> >
> > So how many 1000kg 0-60MPH vehicle acceleration cycles occur every
> > day? Just in the US, there are over 200 million vehicles. Let's
> > conservatively suppose that one quarter of them are used daily
> > and experience two dozen (24) 0-60MPH acceleration cycles.
> > That means:
> >
> > (200M vehicles / 4) * (24 a.c.) = 1.2B acceleration cycles
> >
> > 1.2B accel. cycles / 517 = 2,321,083 gallons of gas saved per day
> >
> > Obviously you can slice and dice this many ways. We haven't
> > factored in the capital cost of Stored hydraulic energy
> > propulsion system either, and with gas under $2 gallon in most
> > areas of the USA maybe it doesn't yet pay. Maybe it would with
> > $5 gallon gas. Or maybe it would in a commercial application
> > like buses or trucks. I dunno.
> >
> > A variety of assumptions can be applied, but the main point is
> > that there ARE things that can be done to improve vehicle
> > efficiency that aren't yet being done and just because automobile
> > manufacturer's aren't doing them yet doesn't necessarily mean
> > they're not possible or not feasible. Usually these "miracle"
> > gas mileage increasing things are gimmicks. But not always.
> >
> > FH
> >
> > P.S. I don't work for SHEP, own any of their stock or have any
> > affiliation with them whatsoever.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:52:34 -0500, "XXXXX" <NOSPAM@ISP.COM> wrote:
> >
> > > >I got a junk email about this device and I was wondering what your

take
> is
> > > >on it. Here is the link: http://www.fuelsaverpro.com/
> > > >
> > > >

> >
> > > If it worked, it would be on every vehicle when it left the factory.

> >
> > > Even if it only improved by 1mpg... that would be a big step in
> > > enhancing CAFE ratings, which is MAJORLY beneficial to the automakers.

> >
> > > --- Rich
> > > http://richlockyer.nospampleasetripod.com/

>
>



  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:37 pm.

Attribution:
Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers



ToyotaLexusForum.com is an unofficial community for car enthusiasts. ToyotaLexusForum.com is not affiliated with Toyota Motor Corporation in any way.
Toyota Motor Corporation does not sponsor, support, or endorse ToyotaLexusForum.com in any way.
Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.